Buzzard Control - Nest destruction (2 Viewers)

[Mike Price]

It would appear that despite reassurance that Buzzards were safe from this type of control after last years debacle, DEFRA have sneaked a couple in anyway

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/23/government-licenced-buzzard-egg-destruction

http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2013/05/23/buzzardgate-2.aspx

 

[Robin Edwards]

It would appear that despite reassurance that Buzzards were safe from this type of control after last years debacle, DEFRA have sneaked a couple in anyway

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/23/government-licenced-buzzard-egg-destruction

http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2013/05/23/buzzardgate-2.aspx

Mike,
why we should have no trust in our current government to do anything right when it comes to protecting our environment. They can swivel their eyes all they like but they have to be voted out of office at the earliest opportunity.

Unfortunately our Ministers, Patterson & Benyon have vested interests in sport shooting and are unlikely to listen to science or those that know far more about our environment than they do. They demonstrate an interest only in self preservation and the interests of their own kind and those lobbiests that pull their strings in the NFU and elsewhere. Shameful abuse of public office in my opinion.

Edit - more here :- http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?cate=__14456

 

[Jack Dawe]

So, basically, despite assurances, and despite continuing discussions with the RSPB, the dissembling, lying bastards simply went behind all our backs and killed some anyway. And, surprise, surprise, the location of the destroyed birds is being kept secret because it's an emotive issue and because of "public safety". Surely that is an unsubstantiated and wholly inadequate excuse for withholding information under the FOI Act and I hope the RSPB will press legally for disclosure. Am I alone in suspecting that potentially severe political embarrassment is the real reason for secrecy? What price democracy?
:storm:

 

[Robin Edwards]

And as if (Un)Natural England isn’t considered bad enough following the news that broke yesterday about Buzzards, seems that there is probably nothing sacred enough that they won't license to cull if there is claimed detriment to sports shooting.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/23/conservation-agency-approved-cull-endangered-birds

I don't consider myself particularly interested in politics and have learnt from experience not to trust any politicians from any persuasion. Right now though, also given the upcoming Badger debacle, I'm feeling more incensed than ever before to try, in some small way to add my voice and try and correct some of the madness. I would urge others to bombard their MPs and government ministers as I feel inclined to do.

 

[MJB]

I don't consider myself particularly interested in politics and have learnt from experience not to trust any politicians from any persuasion. Right now though, also given the upcoming Badger debacle, I'm feeling more incensed than ever before to try, in some small way to add my voice and try and correct some of the madness. I would urge others to bombard their MPs and government ministers as I feel inclined to do.

It is likely that if the UKIP/Mail/Telegraph efforts influence this government to support leaving the EU, the protections put in place by past adherence to the EU Birds Directive and associated conservation legislation and agreements will disappear... That would be yet another reason to become incensed.:C
MJB

 

[Robin Edwards]

It is likely that if the UKIP/Mail/Telegraph efforts influence this government to support leaving the EU, the protections put in place by past adherence to the EU Birds Directive and associated conservation legislation and agreements will disappear... That would be yet another reason to become incensed.:C
MJB

I couldn't agree more - some of our existing environmental legislation has only been adopted because it's come from the EU. I'm sure there are plenty in our coalition and beyond that would like to scrap anything that hinders profiteering from our countryside in any way possible.

 

[Mostly Autumn]

Here's a petition to stop this, please sign if you haven't already.

http://raptorpersecutionscotland.wo...h-do-not-licence-buzzard-culling-in-scotland/

 

[Sangahyando]

It's common knowledge that Common Buzzards mostly eat voles, mice, and maybe rabbits. I can see why they view Goshawks or eagles as threats to their precious game birds, but this is getting really inane. What will they be going after when buzzards have been wiped out? Shrews, maybe? After all, they're carnivorous too.

By the way, is it legitimate for foreigners (like me, for example) to sign petitions of this kind?

It is likely that if the UKIP/Mail/Telegraph efforts influence this government to support leaving the EU, the protections put in place by past adherence to the EU Birds Directive and associated conservation legislation and agreements will disappear... That would be yet another reason to become incensed.:C
MJB

I'm sure Labour is just as guilty, given the mess they've created in other fields of politics. Also, the LBBG culling seems to have been going on for decades, according to the article.

 

[Robin Edwards]

Written response from Natural England - In summary, if natural species damage sporting interests then NE think it reasonable to issue licences.

Thank you for your email received on the 31st May 2013 in which you raised concerns over the recent decision to issue a licence for the removal of four buzzard nests from a pheasant shoot.

The recovery of the common buzzard population in England is a fantastic conservation success story and we should celebrate the fact that they can regularly be seen soaring above the countryside in most areas of the country.

Most recent authoritative population figures provided by the Avian Population Estimate Panel (APEP) estimate the number of territorial breeding pairs of common buzzard in the UK as between 57,000 and 79,000. This means that at its peak, in late summer, the total population, including non-breeding birds and young of the year, is likely to be about 300,000 birds.

While the available evidence suggests that on average, predation of pheasants by buzzards is low in certain isolated cases buzzards can cause serious problems. In this particular case a small scale shooting enterprise had sustained increased levels of predation by buzzards over a period of several years.

Where there are conflicts between protected species and human interests, Natural England always advocates the least severe measures to resolve problems. On this occasion Natural England provided advice on a wide range of non-lethal methods - including scaring, diversionary feeding and habitat improvements - but despite these measures being used over a number of years, buzzard predation continued.

Owing to the impact of predation on the viability of the shooting enterprise, the shoot submitted a licence application seeking permission to carry out lethal control (shooting) and nest destruction. The application was rigorously assessed in line with Government policy, which permits the management of protected species, including birds of prey, where specified criteria are met. We concluded that the damage being caused was not serious enough to licence lethal control, but did meet the criteria for the less severe option of nest destruction. A licence authorising the removal of a total of four buzzard nests was issued on that basis, with the licence operating over a short time period to reduce the risk of eggs being present. A total of four nests were removed with no evidence that eggs were present at the time of removal. No further control activity has been authorised.

Natural England recognises that some people object to birds of prey being controlled to protect pheasants released for the purposes of shooting. As the body responsible for issuing licences in England, Natural England is duty bound to operate in accordance with Government policy and the law. The legislation, in this case the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), allows people to apply for permission to take action against protected species to prevent serious damage to livestock, which includes any ‘animal kept for the provision or improvement of shooting’ (section 27 of the Act). Birds of prey are not afforded any special status under the law and it is Government licensing policy that all applications, whether for birds or prey or more commonly controlled protected species like gulls and corvids, are judged against the same criteria. Natural England assesses each application objectively on its merits in line with the principle that licences may not be unreasonably withheld. If we receive future applications to destroy buzzard nests then these will be assessed on their merits, as are all licence applications.

While accepting that not everyone will agree with our decision in this case, we are confident that the conservation status of buzzards will not be adversely impacted by the destruction of a small number of nests. Nest destruction was authorised early in the nesting season to deter the buzzards from the area where they are causing problems and give them maximum opportunity to successfully nest elsewhere this year.

If you would like to know more about why we decided to issue the licences please refer licence documents published on our Disclosure Log(i).

While Government policy for species licensing is freely available for the public to scrutinise(ii) members of the public are entitled to expect a reasonable degree of privacy in their use of the licensing system, and it is not current practice to provide an opportunity for third parties to scrutinise licence applications that we receive. A summary of all licences issued is made available on the Natural England website(iii) and we submit details of licences issued under the Birds Directive annually to the European Commission(iv).

Further information, and copies of the licences issued can be found on our website: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/regulation/wildlife/species/buzzardlicence.aspx

Sources

(i): Details of licences and assessment in recent cases are available from the disclosure log (see 24 May 2013 entry): http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/freedom_of_information/disclosurelog.aspx

(ii): Government policy for licensing:

http://archive.defra.gov.uk/wildlif...ement/documents/section16excludingrelease.pdf
http://archive.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/wildlife/management/documents/overarch-policy.pdf
(iii): Natural England licence statistics (not yet updated for 2012) are available at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/regulation/wildlife/licences/statistics.aspx

(iv): National reports on wild bird licensing are available from the EU at: http://rod.eionet.europa.eu/obligations/276/deliveries


Customer Services

Natural England

 

[Jack Dawe]

Thanks for posting this, Robin. So we read in NE's review document "While buzzards are undoubtedly predating on the pheasants we cannot accurately predict the scale of that predation from the information provided, or even be confident in ascribing buzzard predation as main cause of declines in return rates (for example, of the 35 carcases autopsied in 2011-12, only 14% exhibited clear signs of avian predation)." [That's 5 carcases out of 35.] I didn't spot any evidence that NE have any data of their own for the predation by Buzzards and Sparrowhawks. In fact it looks to me as if the licenses were issued on very flimsy proof, if any at all. All I can say is that they had better monitor the effect of this control very closely themselves and certainly not by just relying on data presented by those with a vested interest in exaggerating the effect.

 

[Robin Edwards]

Indeed. So in summary, it means that any natural species is unsafe and likely to "control" if said body requesting licence claims as having viability of their sporting interests adversly impacted. The current government are unlikely to stick to what the science really tells us and will just support their lobbyists.

It's a bit like my chickens. If I don't keep them penned and housed at night Mr Fox would pay a visit just like Mr Blue Tit will surely visit the other food I put out. I can hardly blame either for visiting.
However, if I choose to raise 00's and 000's of reared pheasants then NE will probably allow me to control anything deemed to be a predator which I claim to be impacting my sport, irrespective of whether the proven probability of them truly impacting my livlihood is really minimal.

What might be next? Red Kite perhaps?

I also like the implication that NE are in some way responsible for the fantastic recovery of the Common Buzzard in the UK but make no mention that this is a species recovering from past persecution. 300,000 birds. So what? It's a big number, as is 30-40 Million released pheasants!

 

[Firecrest5]

so on a purely pro-rata statistical basis that is 1.96m pheasants per annum then.

I actually thought their response was quite reasoned, they cited specific "problem" birds, that all other scaring measures had been undertaken and that the licence was issued in compliance with the law.

(for example, of the 35 carcases autopsied in 2011-12, only 14% exhibited clear signs of avian predation)." [That's 5 carcases out of 35.]